Protests and police on campus

[spork]

Peak protest has come and gone. Final exams start soon. In another week, undergrads will have left campus.

[apl68]

The key sentence, in my opinion, is "You don't see this in lower tier schools from kids of lower socio-economic standing because they aren't plagued with the guilt of privilege that they're seeking to launder through Middle East role plays of feigned suffering."

Probably a good deal of truth to that.

Some of the stacked and overturned furniture in the photos in the article Langue_doc posted looks like that highly durable old-school wooden stuff.  It may well have been used for a similar purpose during the Vietnam-era protests.  At least they don't seem to have gone around wantonly breaking stained-glass windows in the buildings.

Wonder whether those non-students spotted among the demonstrators are actually "professional agitators" from out of town, or simply local lewd fellows of the baser sort taking an opportunity to blow off some steam by joining a protest?  Either way, if the protest's organizers can't keep such people from co-opting their protest for their own purposes, they'd do well to reconsider the wisdom of these demonstrations.

[Wahoo Redux]

Wonder whether those non-students spotted among the demonstrators are actually "professional agitators" from out of town, or simply local lewd fellows of the baser sort taking an opportunity to blow off some steam by joining a protest?  Either way, if the protest's organizers can't keep such people from co-opting their protest for their own purposes, they'd do well to reconsider the wisdom of these demonstrations.

I was on a "liberal" campus during the first Gulf War when we only had, like, a week to protest.  The students managed not to damage anything, but I became convinced that their motivation was not pacificism but the excitement and adventure of the protest.  I was a bit older than most undergrads, so while I went to see the show I wasn't terribly impressed. 

What we ended up with were a number of elderly hippies stoking on the disruption. I'm sure someone has done scholarship on this aspect of American college life, and I just wonder how much protest is genuine and how much is the perception on students' part that this is how they are supposed to object and express themselves.  Certainly it is okay to support Gaza in this situation and call on Israel to behave in a civilized manner (without being accused of antisemitism), I just wonder how much actual good it does for students to wreck their own campuses.

[secundem_artem]

Sent to me by a parent of a current Columbia undergrad:

https://twitter.com/elicalebon/status/1785560131100618798?s=49&t=RRIS-Y6CCLizLM83-jthEA

The key sentence, in my opinion, is "You don't see this in lower tier schools from kids of lower socio-economic standing because they aren't plagued with the guilt of privilege that they're seeking to launder through Middle East role plays of feigned suffering."

Nothing more amusing than seeing a student whiter than an albino in a snowstorm wearing a kaffiyeh.  Once upon a time, these same students would have said that was cultural appropriation.

That said, the real idiots are the faculty who have chosen to join this and are astonished to find themselves tackled to the ground and led away in zip cuffs.  PhD =/= all that bright it seems

[jimbogumbo]

I confess that I am more than a bit amazed at these posts. Many of the students protesting are in fact doing so because they think what Israel is doing is wrong. Just as they did in the 1980's to protest what was happening in South Africa. Just as they did in the 1960's to promote civil rights for Blacks.

There is a great deal of peaceful congregating being met with police in riot gear (just because we can?). An example from Indiana University. A small group (fewer than 100) set up tents at Dunn Meadows, a nice green space in the heart of campus. This space has traditionally been a place students throw frisbees, hang out, do what students do. It has ALSO been a space where students meet to protest, most famously in the 1960's, where thousands would be. Never any major shows of police force, because essentially nothing was shut down.


Now? The IU BoT meets on Wednesday evening and passes an emergency resolution that sets a new policy where setting up tents without prior approval is a violation. IU sends in the state police on Thursday and forcibly remove the students, and tear down the tents. Over 60 arrests. Did I mention the snipers? Yes, State Police head Carter has confirmed that over the two days this "action" was undertaken there were in fact police snipers on rooftops. All to combat a protest which featured no violence, no destruction and in fact little (if any) disruption of campus activities.


There has been, imo, a nightmarish response across the nation, encouraged by conservative media and politicians, and abetted by spineless liberals and administrators. There simply was no need at a great many campuses for this series of escalations by institutional forces. None.

[Wahoo Redux]

Nothing more amusing than seeing a student whiter than an albino in a snowstorm wearing a kaffiyeh.  Once upon a time, these same students would have said that was cultural appropriation.

That said, the real idiots are the faculty who have chosen to join this and are astonished to find themselves tackled to the ground and led away in zip cuffs.  PhD =/= all that bright it seems.

I confess that I am more than a bit amazed at these posts.

There has been, imo, a nightmarish response across the nation, encouraged by conservative media and politicians, and abetted by spineless liberals and administrators. There simply was no need at a great many campuses for this series of escalations by institutional forces. None.

As with most things in culture, there is little black and white.  Some of these students are grandstanding and performing irrationally (watch the videos).  Some, I am sure, are truly concerned.  Cops behave in the manner cops tend to do in these scenarios.

As with most things in culture, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the polarities.

[dismalist]

I don't give a shit about which higher education institutions will survive in the eternal struggle for resources. There are enough that some good ones will surely survive. I see the current fracas on campuses as a failure of governance in some places. Those with good governance will succeed.

But, to not put too dismal an edge on this, there is [Robert] Conquest's Third Law of Politics: The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organisation is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies. :-)

Somebody explains ["duplicative language without appropriate attribution" follows]: What makes this paradox so insightful? I take it to mean that any organisation that survives long enough ends up being run in such a way as to contradict its founding purpose. As an organisation grows and becomes more complex, it ends up acting primarily to ensure its own perpetuation. The purpose for which it was founded becomes secondary to its own survival. In fact, for many in the organisation, possibly the vast majority, its continued survival becomes confused with the purpose it was originally founded to deliver. This can lead to behaviours that seem rational when viewed from the perspective of perpetuating the organisation but look counter-intuitive when considered from the perspective of what the organisation ostensibly exists to do.

This is descriptively good stuff. I'm just predicting that those protesting got the details wrong. To hell with psychologizing -- they're being instrumentalized, useful idiots.

[spork]

[. . .]

Never any major shows of police force, because essentially nothing was shut down.

[. . .]

Paralysis followed by incompetent overreaction by the corporate management of Ivy League and Ivy League-adjacent universities reflects the new normal. Well, not really new, since Thorstein Veblen wrote about this over a hundred years ago in The Higher Learning in America and The Theory of the Leisure Class. Tents and building occupations are bad PR that could hurt the bottom line, especially as commencement ceremonies draw near.

[. . .]

there is [Robert] Conquest's Third Law of Politics: The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organisation is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies. :-)

[. . .]

You've reminded me of Erving Gottman's "total institutions."

they're being instrumentalized, useful idiots.

Got to internationalize something. If not the Intifada, something else.

[secundem_artem]

I don't give a shit about which higher education institutions will survive in the eternal struggle for resources. There are enough that some good ones will surely survive. I see the current fracas on campuses as a failure of governance in some places. Those with good governance will succeed.

But, to not put too dismal an edge on this, there is [Robert] Conquest's Third Law of Politics: The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organisation is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies. :-)

Somebody explains ["duplicative language without appropriate attribution" follows]: What makes this paradox so insightful? I take it to mean that any organisation that survives long enough ends up being run in such a way as to contradict its founding purpose. As an organisation grows and becomes more complex, it ends up acting primarily to ensure its own perpetuation. The purpose for which it was founded becomes secondary to its own survival. In fact, for many in the organisation, possibly the vast majority, its continued survival becomes confused with the purpose it was originally founded to deliver. This can lead to behaviours that seem rational when viewed from the perspective of perpetuating the organisation but look counter-intuitive when considered from the perspective of what the organisation ostensibly exists to do.

This is descriptively good stuff. I'm just predicting that those protesting got the details wrong. To hell with psychologizing -- they're being instrumentalized, useful idiots.

Pretty much what Ivan Illich wrote in the 1970's. Eventually, any organization evolves to become the cause of the problems it was designed to solve.  Healthcare, education etc.  Healthcare was designed to reduce suffering but causes a fair bit of harm and suffering along the way.  Teaching students about structural racism and violence - and they take it far too seriously and start to engage in their own separation into in/out groups and maybe tearing up the quad.

[dismalist]

Also "duplicative language without appropriate attribution": As a society, we're like the Marlon Brando character Johnny Strabler in The Wild One. "Hey Johnny," a woman asks him, "what are you rebelling against?" His laconic, iconic response: "Whaddya got?"

[Wahoo Redux]

In some ways the situation is much simpler than any of that.

The students are occupying government property designated for a specific activity, not camping, or private property that is designated for whatever, but not camping.

If administration tells students they have to go, it is a lawful command.  Same with the cops.  If the students do not leave, the cops can lawfully use reasonable force (and before we vilify them too much, police are not breaking heads or using chokeholds, they are wrestling students and sometimes a professor into handcuffs and then escorting them off campus----hardly the treatment Palestinians are subject to).

Should police not enforce lawful orders simply because the complaints against Israel are justifiable? 

[jimbogumbo]

It is simler in this way also. Administrators always overreact, contrary to Fox News headlines.


I asked someone once about a student I suspected of lying about an instructor. All I to my source was I'm going to say a name, tell me what you think. Her response: " He lies, he lies all the time. He can't help himself. He lies even when the truth would be better for him."


That was definitely the case at IU, and AZ, and WI etc etc. The response simply makes things worse for the campus. In the IU case, yes they could ask the police in (albeit under a shady pretext), but it wasn't in the administration's best interest. They did it anyway.


Even if justified to have police get students to disperse, batons, let alone snipers, rubber bullets or chemical gas is unjustified for peaceful gatherings. Almost all of these were peaceful UNTIL cops started busting.


No matter whether the students are justified, ill-informed or pawns, the institutional response is often counter productive.


And in case you think I'm over reacting, in two days it will be May 4, followed soon by May 15. We've done it before, and learned nothing.

[Parasaurolophus]

Did I mention the snipers? Yes, State Police head Carter has confirmed that over the two days this "action" was undertaken there were in fact police snipers on rooftops. All to combat a protest which featured no violence, no destruction and in fact little (if any) disruption of campus activities.

Holy shit. What the ever-living fuck?! Talk about making 'some' students feel unsafe on campus.

[dismalist]

The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.

[Langue_doc]

Approximately 30% of the so-called protestors were not affiliated with the university; it isn't clear how they were able to enter campus which has been closed to students and employees.

Locks, Chains, Diversions: How Columbia Students Seized Hamilton Hall
Some of those arrested during the pro-Palestinian demonstration were outsiders, who appeared to be unaffiliated with the school, according to an analysis of Police Department data.

But the takeover of Hamilton Hall was a new turning point. The university decided to call in the police to clear the building — drawing both harsh criticism and praise, and raising new questions about who, exactly, was behind the growing unrest.

The people who took over the building were an offshoot of a larger group of protesters who had been camping out on campus in an unauthorized pro-Palestinian demonstration. On Tuesday night, more than 100 of them — people inside the hall along with others outside on campus and those beyond Columbia's gates — were arrested.

On Thursday, Mayor Adams and Edward A. Caban, the police commissioner, released a statement saying that of the 112 people arrested at Columbia, 29 percent were not affiliated with the school. That percentage was similar to the findings of a Times analysis of a Police Department list of people who were arrested that night.

At City College, north of Columbia in Manhattan, 170 individuals were arrested, and about 60 percent of them were not affiliated with the school, the statement said.

According to the Times analysis, most of those arrested on and around Columbia's campus appeared to be graduate students, undergraduates or people otherwise affiliated with the school.

At least a few, however, appeared to have no connection to the university, according to The Times's review of the list. One was a 40-year-old man who had been arrested at antigovernment protests around the country, according to a different internal police document. His role in the organization of the protest is still unclear.

The day after New York City police officers stormed into the building through a second-floor window and rooted out the protesters from Hamilton Hall, new details emerged about both the takeover of the building and the operation to reclaim it. The details revealed a 17-hour-long student occupation that was destructive and damaging to property, amateurish, but in some respects, carefully organized.

As for the demands, initially the protests were in support of Gaza. The current demands call for divesting from companies that support Israel. Scroll down several paragraphs for a list of demands and why universities are unable to comply with these.

The difficulty administrators face stems in large part from one of the demands that student protesters are making: that schools end financial ties with companies supporting Israel. Students at Columbia and elsewhere also want universities to publicly disclose all of their investments, to ensure accountability for divestment.

For universities, considering those demands raises a host of problems, both logistical and political, that may make acquiescing nearly impossible.

Subsequently the demands included divesting from a long list of companies including Google and Airbnb.

In a written proposal submitted last December, activists at Columbia listed a number of companies they wanted the school to divest from, including Google, which has a large contract with the Israeli military, and Airbnb, which advertises listings on Israeli settlements in the West Bank. It also named the university's indirect holdings in companies like Caterpillar, a maker of armored bulldozers for the Israeli government, which Columbia owns in an exchange-trade fund managed by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager.

Divesting from Israel is illegal in NY:

In addition, most states, including New York, also have laws that bar public institutions from divesting from Israel, or ban them from entering into contracts with companies that call for boycotts of Israel, to guard against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement that targets Israel. Opponents see the movement as antisemitic for singling out the world's only Jewish-majority state.

There are also technical reasons that divestment would be more difficult now than it was following protests in decades past.